Harper II.4
James Dodson
CHAPTER IV.
THE PRECEPTIVE THEORY AS TO THE USE OF INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC—EXAMINATION OF THE ÆSTHETIC OR RATIONALISTIC PLEA FOR SAID THEORY.
As already stated, the use of instrumental music in divine worship is contended for by some on the ground, that as we are not only permitted, but also bound to employ in the praise of God all the powers of our being, and as we are possessed of the musical faculty, it ought to be used to the utmost in praising God. And as we have a taste and aptitude for instrumental music, it is thought to be but a fair inference from the general principle aforementioned, that we should use such music, as well as vocal, in expressing homage to God. The effect, moreover, it is argued, of a skillful blending of the two kinds of music, is favorable to the spirit of devotion; a circumstance, it is urged, not to be lightly estimated in determining the question in hand.
In answer to this line of argument, it may be said, that in the statement of the general principle, that all our powers should be employed in the praise of God, there is an ambiguity, from which, chiefly, the reasoning under consideration derives its plausibility. The ambiguity lies in the word, praise, which may be used in either a wide or a restricted sense. In its wider sense it denotes any way in which we may do honor to one, or declare our appreciation of his excellence. In its narrower sense, it signifies the formal, specific service of song in the way of worship or adoration. Now the principle that all our powers are to be employed in the praise of God, is true, if the word, praise, is taken in the first sense indicated; untrue, if taken in the second. We are under obligation to consecrate all our resources of mind and body to the glory of God; but it does not follow that everything done by us to this end must be accounted a part of formal, express worship. The sculptor is to use his chisel, just as he is to eat and drink, to the glory of God, but I am not aware that statues and graven images are among the legitimate appliances of worship, or that the making of them is a service of definite and formal praise. If we buy, or sell, or till the ground, we are to do so to the glory of God; but buying and selling and tillage, are not parts of the formal wor-
Page 17
ship of God. In formal praise, the direct as well as the ultimate object before the mind should be to glorify God. In all other exercises, even that of prayer, while the ultimate aim should be to glorify God, the direct, or immediate aim may be to promote our own advantage, or that of others.
Now, the æsthetic argument under notice derives any plausibility which pertains to it, chiefly from confounding the two meanings of the word, praise. In other words it is a sophism resting upon the ambiguity of this term. I am at liberty, and even under obligation to devote all my powers to the service and the honor of God; but it does not, therefore, appear that I either must, or may, worship him by any exertion of my faculties and use of my acquirements. In the matter of worship generally, and of praise in particular, our energies must be exercised, not at will, but according to the directions of God. The Second commandment forbids expressly the making of images, or likenesses in any way, as aids to devotion, or appliances of worship, and so lays a restriction, beyond doubt, on the use of our powers in the matter of worship.
It may be said, however, that in the former dispensation, God prescribed the use of the musical faculty in his worship, in respect both to voice and instruments; whereas he allowed no use of the faculty for painting or sculpture in his worship; and from this it may be inferred that music sustains a different relation to worship, from that sustained by the plastic, or the pictorial art.
To this it may be replied that the Second commandment, while specifying, by way of illustration, not of exhaustive enumeration, certain respects in which the exercise of human ingenuity and energy is to be prohibited in worship, embodies the general principle that in the worship of God, everything must be ordered by himself; non-appointment being tantamount to prohibition. This being assumed as correct, it follows that, unless in so far as it has been appointed by himself, music is unlawful in the worship of God. The fact that man has a musical faculty, does not prove that provision for the exercise of it in the department of worship shall be made, any more than the fact that he possesses a faculty for making statues and pictures, proves that provision shall be made for the use of these in that department. It may be that music is a less sensuous and more ethereal art than either sculpture or painting, and that the use of it is less likely to exert a materializing influence on our religion; yet in the sphere of worship, even music requires to be held within limits, for, constituted as we now are, it would seem that we are always in danger of losing the spiritual in the material.
I am persuaded that the general principle holds good in respect to men, as they are now in the world, that the fullest bodily, or sensuous enjoyment, is incompatible with the fullest spiritual enjoyment, or, in other words, that the more the senses are occupied and gratified, the less are the higher reflective powers of the soul engaged. In what proportion these two departments of activity and enjoyment must stand to each other, so that they shall be mutually helpful and enhancing, is a problem we can hardly solve, and still less express in any clear and definite formula. God, however, can solve what we cannot, and it behooves us to listen submissively to his solution, instead of being carried away with the current
Page 18
clamor about the necessity of carrying æsthetics and culture into our worship. We cannot tell what uses God may yet have for the æsthetical element of our nature, Germs now within us, and which, perhaps, in our present sinful state need to be held in check, or, at least, cautiously drawn out, may, in another state of being, be safely and advantageously developed. The child at school cannot wisely be allowed to use its energies, and cultivate even its natural tastes at “its own sweet will.” There may be need for temporary restraint, coercion and direction, in order that in the end the fruitage may be the richer. So may it be with us. In the present life, it may be of the utmost moment that in the sphere of worship, some of our tastes and powers should be held in entire or partial abeyance, in order that in the life to come, these restricted faculties may revel in the luxury of liberty. It may be that in another state of existence, the childish and infantile of our nature may be harmoniously blended with the sober and the mature. The element of our nature to which the Old Testament pomp of ritual was adapted, and which is comparatively overlooked in our New Testament forms, may in the future world be recognized and amply honored in perfect consistency with the highest spirituality.
If the theory is correct, that the intensification of sensuous enjoyment promotes proportionally, spiritual apprehension and growth, is it not a wonder that the Apostles did not lay more stress than they seem to have done on the expedient of “praise meetings,” on the effort to preach the gospel by singing it, or even on the careful cultivation of the art of singing? If, as we are now so vociferously told, fine music is of such vast importance for the promotion of piety in the Church, and for the conquest of the world, it is very remarkable that the New Testament contains so few hints on the whole subject. It does not appear that when the Apostle Paul went to Ephesus, or Philippi, or Corinth, he set himself to the task of organizing a well-trained choir, not to say orchestra, as if he deemed such an arrangement one of the most valuable, if not absolutely indispensable, appliances of evangelization. Nor do we find in all the New Testament, a single specific direction to cultivate music, even vocal music, as an art of signal value in the sphere of religion. The duty of employing music (I do not say instrumental) is clearly laid down; but not a single hint given as to the artistic execution of the service of song, unless it be the general injunction, “Let all things be done decently and in order.” Ought not this consideration to abate greatly the present demand for fine music in worship, and the disposition to rely on music as a passport through which the gospel may gain access to the hearts of men? When we turn from the New Testament to the modern Church, we find ourselves, so far as the matter of music is concerned, in a widely different atmosphere. Not one direction is given by the Apostles, indicating the great importance of securing in public worship the finest singing, even when they write to churches situated in the great centres of Grecian refinement, where music and the kindred arts were enthusiastically cultivated; whereas a large measure of the time of modern Christians is taken up in the cultivation of the art of music for church use, while grave ecclesiastical assemblies and councils can hardly meet and part, without discussing and setting forth the
Page 19
vast importance of music for the success of the church. Nay, such is the rage for music now, that men, professing to follow the model of the apostolic church, do not scruple to break the peace of churches, and to risk the rending of them asunder from zeal for the use of musical instruments. Who is so blind as not to perceive that in regard to this matter of music, the church of to-day is in startling contrast with the church as organized and regulated by the Apostles?
I am aware that in writing thus, I am likely to incur the charge of barbarism, or at least of being hopelessly destitute of good taste. But whatever might be the truth of that charge, nothing now advanced, justifies it. I have no objection to good music in the worship of God. I prefer it, and believe that professing Christians should seek to conduct the musical part of worship, in accordance with the general principles of good taste, provided always that the chief regard be had to the directions of Scripture and the spiritual aspect of the service. But whenever the church begins to lay great stress on the quality of her music, she has entered on the gulf-stream of ritualism, and differs palpably in her tone from the church as moulded by the Apostles. Nay, more, she differs in the particular alluded to, from the church even of the Old Testament; for, although in the Old Testament church, specific arrangements were made in the time of David, for the use of music in the worship of God, you will search the Old Testament Scriptures in vain for any express directions enjoining a highly artistic execution of the music, even by the trained choir of the temple. But do we not read in Ps. 33:2, “Play skilfully with a loud noise?” Yes, we so read in our version, and the words do not fail to be quoted in season and out of season, in enforcement of the importance of having artistic music in church. It may be observed, however, that it is quoted so often, partly for the reason that there is no other text that can be quoted, from the whole range of the Scriptures that seems so clearly to inculcate the duty of making the music of worship tasteful, if not elaborate. Granting that this sentence bears the meaning put upon it by those who are so fond of quoting it, we must still express surprise, if exquisite music is really so important a proof and help of devotion, that there should hardly be a text in the bible except this to tell us so. Of course one text clearly inculcating any matter is as good as a thousand; and yet we cannot help feeling that what is taught expressly in but one text, or even in a few texts, is not as important as that which is made prominent in many texts. Moreover, it is very questionable whether, or not, the words in the case before us fairly represent the Hebrew original. Admitting for the present the propriety of the rendering “play,” I would state that the literal translation of the sentence is, “Make good to play with a loud noise,” which means not so much to play with exquisite art, as to play with such energy as to express an exultant state of mind. It is heart, rather than art, in playing that is here inculcated.
However it may be with us in another life, I believe that in the present life, the sensuous element in worship needs to be subdued in character. There may be a species of mock devotion produced and fostered by appeals to the æsthetic department of our nature; but genuine devotion, it is our belief, will be more promoted when sensuous gratification is sought and afforded in only a very restricted degree.
Page 20
Were it otherwise, the silence of the Apostles in regard to the subject of musical culture as a means of grace, and an expedient for spreading the gospel, would be unaccountable. The great law formulated by Sir William Hamilton, that perception and feeling are to each other in an inverse ratio, admits of an application to the case in hand. God knows, as we do not, in what proportion the sensuous element is to have place in the exercises of worship, and it is wise for us to seek counsel in this matter at the lively oracles, rather than at the lips of the devotees of art.